Unrepentant terrorist William Ayers turned back at Canadian border. It seems the Canadians are brighter than I thought. I wish Americans could figure out that he is bad news as fast as the Canadians have.

I bet this has Obama mad, he has to be wondering why wont this guy just go away.... and on the eve of his corrination too!

Unrepentant terrorist William Ayers turned back at Canadian border. It seems the Canadians are brighter than I thought. I wish Americans could figure out that he is bad news as fast as the Canadians have.

I bet this has Obama mad, he has to be wondering why wont this guy just go away.... and on the eve of his corrination too!

We've been over this before but perhaps you need some reminding...Ayers was never convicted of anything and is now a distinguished professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Education.

Considering the campaign is over, continuing to harp on his activities with the Weather Underground is counter productive. The Vietnam war era was a desperate time...that called for desperate measures.

BTW NO, it 's rare that you agree with Canada on anything...do I detect a hint of hypocrisy here as well?

We've been over this before but perhaps you need some reminding...Ayers was never convicted of anything and is now a distinguished professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Education.

Considering the campaign is over, continuing to harp on his activities with the Weather Underground is counter productive. The Vietnam war era was a desperate time...that called for desperate measures.

BTW NO, it 's rare that you agree with Canada on anything...do I detect a hint of hypocrisy here as well?

Click to expand...

Yes we have been over this before. The feds had to drop the charges because they gained the info on his GUILT illegally. He never denied he did it, in fact he bragged about doing it and said he wished he would have done more.

He is about as distinguished as Ward Churchill, something about these colleges makes them want to hire the most seedy types.

Canada was smart to send his butt a'packin! Canada can do some smart things at times, within a year they will be more conservative than we are *wink*

Ah, the irony! It is interesting reading the difference in the articles reporting the incident, at least the few actual news stories about it. The one you linked is the first tier in the Toronto Star; here is the one from the Chicago Tribune. I tried every way I could to read this as an objective report, and it just ain't happenin'! In USA Today it was a bit better, but clipped and with a reference to the Tribune article and another Canadian publication.

Fox News article simple reported what happened, with obligatory connections to PEBO and the campaign. Doing a Google search in News, there were 21 hits. Two were blogs; 8 were Canadian, 4 were US. Along with a few from other foreign sources and other Canadian and US non-media news outlets (read more opinion than not).

Interestingly, the reports of a supportive nature to Ayers tended to make it sound like this was an unjustified stop, that he was denied the right to see his (Canadian) attorney who was at the airport awaiting him, and a definite implication that this was somehow done as an intended smear or embarrassment to PEBO.

Digging deeper, you find that he had been turned back a few years ago. You find that it is border agents are allowed some discretion with how they interpret old criminal charges. You find out that Ayers chose to return to Chicago, as the Canadian process could take several days, during which he would have to be detained. So I guess that's why he may have NOT wanted his lawyers help - he could still be sitting in a 12x12 room somewhere, seeking permission for food, water, toilet facilities, etc. He chose to go home and see what can be done to resolve this once and for all, and to whine.

Love this line from Ayers:

"...The border guards reviewed some stuff and said I wasn't going to be allowed into Canada. To me it seems quite bureaucratic and not at all interesting ... If it were me I would have let me in. I couldn't possibly be a threat to Canada."

Ah, the irony! It is interesting reading the difference in the articles reporting the incident, at least the few actual news stories about it. The one you linked is the first tier in the Toronto Star; here is the one from the Chicago Tribune. I tried every way I could to read this as an objective report, and it just ain't happenin'! In USA Today it was a bit better, but clipped and with a reference to the Tribune article and another Canadian publication.

Fox News article simple reported what happened, with obligatory connections to PEBO and the campaign. Doing a Google search in News, there were 21 hits. Two were blogs; 8 were Canadian, 4 were US. Along with a few from other foreign sources and other Canadian and US non-media news outlets (read more opinion than not).

Interestingly, the reports of a supportive nature to Ayers tended to make it sound like this was an unjustified stop, that he was denied the right to see his (Canadian) attorney who was at the airport awaiting him, and a definite implication that this was somehow done as an intended smear or embarrassment to PEBO.

Digging deeper, you find that he had been turned back a few years ago. You find that it is border agents are allowed some discretion with how they interpret old criminal charges. You find out that Ayers chose to return to Chicago, as the Canadian process could take several days, during which he would have to be detained. So I guess that's why he may have NOT wanted his lawyers help - he could still be sitting in a 12x12 room somewhere, seeking permission for food, water, toilet facilities, etc. He chose to go home and see what can be done to resolve this once and for all, and to whine.

Love this line from Ayers:

Mr Ayers, ah, Here's your sign!

Click to expand...

Great digging, I only read the one story. I did like his thoughts on how he would have let him self in if it were up to him.

Unrepentant terrorist William Ayers turned back at Canadian border. It seems the Canadians are brighter than I thought....

Click to expand...

Just wanted to make note: Our Canadian friends are very much like us. For the most part, the are pretty reasonable people who have made some significant blunders in their elections. But lots of very bright people who are either overwhelmed by their stuck-on-stupid counterparts, or temporarily fooled by the Siren's song. They snap out of it and come to their senses.

Hopefully we will too, without too many tragic consequences. Rev. Wright is infamous for his "The Chickennnnssss... are commming hooommmmee... to rooosssssst!" line in one of his God's love and forgiveness sermons. Staying with the chicken adages, we now have the foxes (Congress AND the President) in the hen house.

I just want to point out that in many cases, a DUI conviction in America will disqualify someone from entering Canada. It has caused quite a bit of difficulty for Alaskans who want to drive to the lower 48 and get into a big hassle at the border.

Just wanted to make note: Our Canadian friends are very much like us. For the most part, the are pretty reasonable people who have made some significant blunders in their elections. But lots of very bright people who are either overwhelmed by their stuck-on-stupid counterparts, or temporarily fooled by the Siren's song. They snap out of it and come to their senses.

Hopefully we will too, without too many tragic consequences. Rev. Wright is infamous for his "The Chickennnnssss... are commming hooommmmee... to rooosssssst!" line in one of his God's love and forgiveness sermons. Staying with the chicken adages, we now have the foxes (Congress AND the President) in the hen house.

Click to expand...

oh that is a good way of putting it fox in the hen house!!

I have issues with Canada on a few things but this was very smart on their part.

I just want to point out that in many cases, a DUI conviction in America will disqualify someone from entering Canada. It has caused quite a bit of difficulty for Alaskans who want to drive to the lower 48 and get into a big hassle at the border.

Click to expand...

LOL, Bunz, considering your sig...

I think it's totally appropriate for Canada to establish the standards the feel is necessary to secure safety for their citizens and avoid or minimize potential property damage and legal issues.

It would seem that something could be worked out for Alaskans driving to the lower 48 like: 1) no DUI's in 48 months; 2) no injury or property damage resulting from past DUI's; 3) no more than 2 (3, 1, whatever) DUI's over any 5 year period; 4) establishment of strict timeframe and itinerary for route through Canada.

I can certainly understand why anyone with a lick of common sense would want to not allow those who represented any form of potential, real, or perceived threat to my country and people to be refused entry. That is solid border control, which is necessary by implication if you have a border.

Well I am glad I can provide some entertainment... But Bunz would encourage everyone to drink responsibly. I have a clean arrest record and once I have had two adult beverages I no longer drive for the night. I find no excuse for DUI.

I think it's totally appropriate for Canada to establish the standards the feel is necessary to secure safety for their citizens and avoid or minimize potential property damage and legal issues.

Click to expand...

I am not knocking Canada to much, they are allowed to have thier rules and that happens to be one of them. Apparently, if you write a letter to the Queen or something and say your sorry and promise not to do it again, then pay a pocketful of loonies, then you are allowed. But it has made for some interesting situations at the Alaska/Canada border because not everyone know this. Especially considering the border is rather isolated with not much for accomodations for hundred miles on either side of the border. Makes for a potentially dangerous situation in the winter where the temps in that part of the world recently dipped into the -70s.

I can certainly understand why anyone with a lick of common sense would want to not allow those who represented any form of potential, real, or perceived threat to my country and people to be refused entry. That is solid border control, which is necessary by implication if you have a border.